UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA (UNISA)
College of Education — Department of Psychology of Education
⋄
ASSESSMENT 03
Cognition and Learning — Year Module 2026
⋄
Module Code: PDP4802
Module Name: Cognition and Learning
Assessment No.: Assessment 03
Due Date: 28 August 2026
Semester: Year Module 2026
Unique Number: 613900
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for PDP4802
at the University of South Africa.
,UNISA | PDP4802 Assessment 03 — Multiple Intelligences
Question 1: Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences and Classroom Application
Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences, first introduced in 1983, fundamentally challenged
the traditional view that intelligence is a single, fixed capacity measurable by standardised
tests. Instead, Gardner proposed that human beings possess at least eight distinct cognitive
abilities, each representing a different way of processing information and engaging with the
world (Gardner, 1983, as cited in Attwood, 2022). This assessment explores how those intelli-
gences can be identified, critically evaluated, and practically applied in a classroom setting on
the topic of Looking After Nature.
1.1 Connell Multiple Intelligence Questionnaire: Personal Completion
The Connell Multiple Intelligence Questionnaire for Children (Connell, as cited in Shearer,
1997) was completed. Responses are indicated below with a tick next to each statement that
applies.
Completed Connell Questionnaire — Sample Responses
Area 1 — Musical (Music Smart):
[X] I like to listen to songs on the radio or a CD.
[X] I can easily remember tunes, raps, or melodies.
[X] I like to sing.
Score: 3 (Moderate area)
Area 2 — Spatial (Picture Smart):
[X] I like art classes.
[X] I like to draw, paint, and make things with clay.
[X] I enjoy putting puzzles together.
[X] I can create a picture in my mind to help me think things through.
[X] I notice the different styles of things, such as clothes, cars, and hairstyles.
Score: 5 (Very strong area)
Area 3 — Linguistic (Word Smart):
[X] I like to read books, magazines, and comic books.
[X] I have a good vocabulary and like to learn new words.
[X] I like to write.
[X] I think it would be fun to keep a journal of my thoughts and ideas.
Page 1 of 15
,UNISA | PDP4802 Assessment 03 — Multiple Intelligences
[X] I like to talk to my friends on the telephone.
Score: 5 (Very strong area)
Area 4 — Naturalistic (Nature Smart):
[X] I like being outside.
[X] I like to observe nature’s changes, such as thunderstorms, rain, snow, and sunshine.
[X] I help to recycle and take care of our environment.
Score: 3 (Moderate area)
Area 5 — Logical-Mathematical (Math Smart):
[X] I like to do science experiments and go to science museums.
[X] It is fun to solve mysteries.
[X] I can do math problems in my head and make good estimates.
Score: 3 (Moderate area)
Area 6 — Bodily-Kinaesthetic (Body Smart):
[X] I like to dance.
[X] I like to play sports such as baseball, soccer, hockey, or football.
[X] I enjoy acting in plays or skits or playing charades.
[X] I like to move when I am thinking about things.
Score: 4 (Moderate area)
Area 7 — Interpersonal (People Smart):
[X] I like to be with my friends often.
[X] I like to help those who need help.
[X] I can usually tell how other people are feeling.
[X] I like to talk in class discussions.
Score: 4 (Moderate area)
Area 8 — Intrapersonal (Self Smart):
[X] I like doing things by myself.
[X] I like to spend time thinking or writing about things that matter to me.
[X] I usually know what my feelings are.
[X] I know what things I am good at, and what things I am not so good at.
Score: 4 (Moderate area)
Page 2 of 15
,UNISA | PDP4802 Assessment 03 — Multiple Intelligences
1.2 Critical Reflection on the Connell Questionnaire (6 marks)
The Connell Multiple Intelligence Questionnaire for Children was designed as a practical, self-
report tool to help teachers quickly gauge which intelligence areas their learners gravitate to-
ward. As a screening instrument, it has genuine classroom value. That said, three questions
deserve honest reflection: whether it suits the learner population, how accurately it captures
real strengths, and whether teachers and learners genuinely benefit from it.
Appropriateness for learner age, context, and learning needs:
The questionnaire was developed within a North American cultural framework and uses refer-
ences that are not universally relatable, such as specific TV programmes, sports types, and
leisure activities that may not reflect the lived realities of South African learners (Van der
Merwe et al., 2022). A learner growing up in a rural South African setting may never have
attended a music concert or played with Legos, yet these items appear in the instrument. This
creates what Van der Merwe et al. (2022) identify as cultural bias in intelligence assessment,
where contextual and demographic factors, including language, culture, and socio-economic
background, directly affect how learners engage with the items. For a Grade 4 learner in an
under-resourced township school, for instance, several items simply will not land. In that sense,
the questionnaire requires contextual adaptation before it can be considered fully appropriate
for South African classrooms.
Accuracy in identifying learner strengths and preferences:
Because the questionnaire relies entirely on self-report, its accuracy depends on the learner’s
ability to accurately reflect on their own preferences. Younger learners may be drawn to ac-
tivities they have been exposed to most, rather than activities that genuinely align with their
dominant intelligence. Hani et al. (as cited in Harianto, 2024) found that learners’ self-perceptions
of their intelligence profiles did not always correlate with observed classroom performance.
That said, the questionnaire does offer a useful starting point for identifying patterns across
a class, particularly when its results are combined with teacher observation and portfolio evi-
dence. It should be treated as one data point, not a definitive diagnosis.
Benefit to teaching and learning:
Despite its limitations, the questionnaire has real instructional value when used appropriately.
It opens a conversation between teachers and learners about different ways of being smart,
which can build self-esteem in learners who do not perform well on traditional academic tasks
Page 3 of 15
, UNISA | PDP4802 Assessment 03 — Multiple Intelligences
(Shearer, 2019). By identifying which areas a learner scores strongly in, teachers can design
tasks that engage multiple pathways to understanding the same content. Studies confirm that
MI-informed instruction, when thoughtfully applied, improves student engagement and moti-
vation (Köksal and Yel, 2007, as cited in Harianto, 2024). The questionnaire is therefore most
beneficial when used as a reflective tool to inform differentiated planning, rather than to label
or track learners.
Critical Consideration
The questionnaire should never be used as a standalone diagnostic tool, particularly in
diverse South African classrooms. Cultural bias, language barriers, and self-report limi-
tations all reduce its measurement validity. It works best alongside teacher observation,
portfolio assessment, and learner conferencing (Van der Merwe et al., 2022).
1.3 Two Additional Intelligence Surveys Appropriate for the Classroom (4 marks)
Instrument 1: Multiple Intelligences Developmental Assessment Scales for Kids (MIDAS-
for-KIDS)
The MIDAS-for-KIDS, developed by Branton Shearer (1998), is a self-report and parent-report
instrument validated across three empirical studies involving over 2,100 children in Grades K–
8. It measures the full range of Gardner’s eight intelligences through age-appropriate items
and produces a detailed profile of the child’s intellectual strengths. What sets it apart from
the Connell questionnaire is its strong psychometric foundation: Shearer (1998) reports ac-
ceptable reliability and validity coefficients, making it one of the few MI instruments devel-
oped according to standard psychometric procedures, a distinction that Gardner himself ac-
knowledged in the MIDAS Manual (as cited in Shearer, 1998). The instrument is available at:
https://www.miresearch.org
Instrument 2: McKenzie’s Multiple Intelligences Survey
Walter McKenzie’s Multiple Intelligences Survey is a 56-item self-report questionnaire de-
signed for older learners (late primary and secondary level). It groups items into the eight in-
telligence domains and produces percentage scores for each, offering a clear visual profile of
dominance areas. The instrument is freely available and has been widely used in both North
American and international educational settings. Because it uses plain, accessible language, it
Page 4 of 15
College of Education — Department of Psychology of Education
⋄
ASSESSMENT 03
Cognition and Learning — Year Module 2026
⋄
Module Code: PDP4802
Module Name: Cognition and Learning
Assessment No.: Assessment 03
Due Date: 28 August 2026
Semester: Year Module 2026
Unique Number: 613900
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for PDP4802
at the University of South Africa.
,UNISA | PDP4802 Assessment 03 — Multiple Intelligences
Question 1: Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences and Classroom Application
Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences, first introduced in 1983, fundamentally challenged
the traditional view that intelligence is a single, fixed capacity measurable by standardised
tests. Instead, Gardner proposed that human beings possess at least eight distinct cognitive
abilities, each representing a different way of processing information and engaging with the
world (Gardner, 1983, as cited in Attwood, 2022). This assessment explores how those intelli-
gences can be identified, critically evaluated, and practically applied in a classroom setting on
the topic of Looking After Nature.
1.1 Connell Multiple Intelligence Questionnaire: Personal Completion
The Connell Multiple Intelligence Questionnaire for Children (Connell, as cited in Shearer,
1997) was completed. Responses are indicated below with a tick next to each statement that
applies.
Completed Connell Questionnaire — Sample Responses
Area 1 — Musical (Music Smart):
[X] I like to listen to songs on the radio or a CD.
[X] I can easily remember tunes, raps, or melodies.
[X] I like to sing.
Score: 3 (Moderate area)
Area 2 — Spatial (Picture Smart):
[X] I like art classes.
[X] I like to draw, paint, and make things with clay.
[X] I enjoy putting puzzles together.
[X] I can create a picture in my mind to help me think things through.
[X] I notice the different styles of things, such as clothes, cars, and hairstyles.
Score: 5 (Very strong area)
Area 3 — Linguistic (Word Smart):
[X] I like to read books, magazines, and comic books.
[X] I have a good vocabulary and like to learn new words.
[X] I like to write.
[X] I think it would be fun to keep a journal of my thoughts and ideas.
Page 1 of 15
,UNISA | PDP4802 Assessment 03 — Multiple Intelligences
[X] I like to talk to my friends on the telephone.
Score: 5 (Very strong area)
Area 4 — Naturalistic (Nature Smart):
[X] I like being outside.
[X] I like to observe nature’s changes, such as thunderstorms, rain, snow, and sunshine.
[X] I help to recycle and take care of our environment.
Score: 3 (Moderate area)
Area 5 — Logical-Mathematical (Math Smart):
[X] I like to do science experiments and go to science museums.
[X] It is fun to solve mysteries.
[X] I can do math problems in my head and make good estimates.
Score: 3 (Moderate area)
Area 6 — Bodily-Kinaesthetic (Body Smart):
[X] I like to dance.
[X] I like to play sports such as baseball, soccer, hockey, or football.
[X] I enjoy acting in plays or skits or playing charades.
[X] I like to move when I am thinking about things.
Score: 4 (Moderate area)
Area 7 — Interpersonal (People Smart):
[X] I like to be with my friends often.
[X] I like to help those who need help.
[X] I can usually tell how other people are feeling.
[X] I like to talk in class discussions.
Score: 4 (Moderate area)
Area 8 — Intrapersonal (Self Smart):
[X] I like doing things by myself.
[X] I like to spend time thinking or writing about things that matter to me.
[X] I usually know what my feelings are.
[X] I know what things I am good at, and what things I am not so good at.
Score: 4 (Moderate area)
Page 2 of 15
,UNISA | PDP4802 Assessment 03 — Multiple Intelligences
1.2 Critical Reflection on the Connell Questionnaire (6 marks)
The Connell Multiple Intelligence Questionnaire for Children was designed as a practical, self-
report tool to help teachers quickly gauge which intelligence areas their learners gravitate to-
ward. As a screening instrument, it has genuine classroom value. That said, three questions
deserve honest reflection: whether it suits the learner population, how accurately it captures
real strengths, and whether teachers and learners genuinely benefit from it.
Appropriateness for learner age, context, and learning needs:
The questionnaire was developed within a North American cultural framework and uses refer-
ences that are not universally relatable, such as specific TV programmes, sports types, and
leisure activities that may not reflect the lived realities of South African learners (Van der
Merwe et al., 2022). A learner growing up in a rural South African setting may never have
attended a music concert or played with Legos, yet these items appear in the instrument. This
creates what Van der Merwe et al. (2022) identify as cultural bias in intelligence assessment,
where contextual and demographic factors, including language, culture, and socio-economic
background, directly affect how learners engage with the items. For a Grade 4 learner in an
under-resourced township school, for instance, several items simply will not land. In that sense,
the questionnaire requires contextual adaptation before it can be considered fully appropriate
for South African classrooms.
Accuracy in identifying learner strengths and preferences:
Because the questionnaire relies entirely on self-report, its accuracy depends on the learner’s
ability to accurately reflect on their own preferences. Younger learners may be drawn to ac-
tivities they have been exposed to most, rather than activities that genuinely align with their
dominant intelligence. Hani et al. (as cited in Harianto, 2024) found that learners’ self-perceptions
of their intelligence profiles did not always correlate with observed classroom performance.
That said, the questionnaire does offer a useful starting point for identifying patterns across
a class, particularly when its results are combined with teacher observation and portfolio evi-
dence. It should be treated as one data point, not a definitive diagnosis.
Benefit to teaching and learning:
Despite its limitations, the questionnaire has real instructional value when used appropriately.
It opens a conversation between teachers and learners about different ways of being smart,
which can build self-esteem in learners who do not perform well on traditional academic tasks
Page 3 of 15
, UNISA | PDP4802 Assessment 03 — Multiple Intelligences
(Shearer, 2019). By identifying which areas a learner scores strongly in, teachers can design
tasks that engage multiple pathways to understanding the same content. Studies confirm that
MI-informed instruction, when thoughtfully applied, improves student engagement and moti-
vation (Köksal and Yel, 2007, as cited in Harianto, 2024). The questionnaire is therefore most
beneficial when used as a reflective tool to inform differentiated planning, rather than to label
or track learners.
Critical Consideration
The questionnaire should never be used as a standalone diagnostic tool, particularly in
diverse South African classrooms. Cultural bias, language barriers, and self-report limi-
tations all reduce its measurement validity. It works best alongside teacher observation,
portfolio assessment, and learner conferencing (Van der Merwe et al., 2022).
1.3 Two Additional Intelligence Surveys Appropriate for the Classroom (4 marks)
Instrument 1: Multiple Intelligences Developmental Assessment Scales for Kids (MIDAS-
for-KIDS)
The MIDAS-for-KIDS, developed by Branton Shearer (1998), is a self-report and parent-report
instrument validated across three empirical studies involving over 2,100 children in Grades K–
8. It measures the full range of Gardner’s eight intelligences through age-appropriate items
and produces a detailed profile of the child’s intellectual strengths. What sets it apart from
the Connell questionnaire is its strong psychometric foundation: Shearer (1998) reports ac-
ceptable reliability and validity coefficients, making it one of the few MI instruments devel-
oped according to standard psychometric procedures, a distinction that Gardner himself ac-
knowledged in the MIDAS Manual (as cited in Shearer, 1998). The instrument is available at:
https://www.miresearch.org
Instrument 2: McKenzie’s Multiple Intelligences Survey
Walter McKenzie’s Multiple Intelligences Survey is a 56-item self-report questionnaire de-
signed for older learners (late primary and secondary level). It groups items into the eight in-
telligence domains and produces percentage scores for each, offering a clear visual profile of
dominance areas. The instrument is freely available and has been widely used in both North
American and international educational settings. Because it uses plain, accessible language, it
Page 4 of 15
